The Little Purple Notebook On How To Escape From This Universe
                       Copyleft � 1998 by Maximilian J. Sandor, Ph.D.
                   Subscription Information: Maria Loren [email protected]
                        Website: http://transmillennium.net/pnohteftu/

------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Bruce Kodish, Ph.D., P.T., has been a distinguished researcher,
   practitioner and teacher of general-semantics for many years. He is
successfully applying g-s, the Alexander Technique and the McKenzie Method
of Mechanical Diagnosis and Therapy of the Spine in his own practice. His
    site can be found at  http://www.transmillennium.net/brucekodish/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Emptying Your Cup: Non-Verbal Awareness and General-Semantics
                        by Bruce I. Kodish, Ph.D. � 1997

                  A version of this article was published in
          ETC.: a Review of General Semantics, Vol. 55, No. 1, Spring 1998


Wishing to talk about Zen philosophy, a professor visited a Zen master. As
they sat together the Zen master poured tea. He kept on pouring as the tea
overflowed onto the floor. "Stop!" said the professor, "you have filled the
cup, no more will go in." The Zen master replied, "You are like that cup,
full of your own ideas and speculations. If you wish to know Zen, you must
first empty your cup."

Like Zen, an important aspect of general-semantics (g-s) training involves
guided practice in "emptying your cup": looking, listening, tasting,
feeling, experiencing, etc., at what Korzybski called "the silent,
un-speakable level". This includes an attitude towards living that involves
an awareness of yourself as an organism-as-a-whole-in-an-environment.

Some people who come to a g-s seminar-workshop expecting to learn about
language use and word 'meanings' are surprised by this. However, g-s is not
about 'semantics', understood as the study of linguistic 'meanings'.
Rather, g-s involves a practical and personal study of what we call our
semantic or evaluational reactions. Evaluational reactions include
non-verbal as well as verbal, 'thinking' and 'feeling' responses to any
events, not just words and symbols. Our focus is on internalizing some
notions that can benefit our personal lives beyond the level of verbal,
intellectual understanding alone.

Multiple Amphibians, Multiple 'Worlds'

Aldous Huxley pointed out, "Every adult human being is a multiple
amphibian, the inhabitant, simultaneously or by turns, of several worlds"
(1972, 419). These 'worlds' do not occupy metaphysically separate realms.
Rather, I interpret the term 'worlds' as metaphorically referring to
important, differentiated but not separate, aspects of the universe that we
participate in.

The first of these 'worlds' is the physical 'world' as postulated by
natural science. Theoretically, we can understand our functioning as
physico-chemical organisms within complex ever-changing physico-chemical
environments. What we know about 'world'1 is inferred, i.e., not directly
known in our immediate experience. We know about it through scientific
theorizing tested through experimentation and observations. Scientific
methods provide more or less reliable information about ourselves and our
surroundings. Korzybski referred to the theoretically understood physical
'world' as the "event" level of existence and represented it as a parabola
in his structural differential model (s.d.) [See Figure 1]


[Image see Website http://transmillennium.net/pnohteftu/
or the etc magazine]


    Figure 1 - Structural Differential
Reproduced from Kodish and Kodish.
       Drive Yourself Sane, p. 64

The second 'world' is that of sensations/perceptions which we abstract
(select-construct) from events within and around us. As infants we
experience ourselves fully in this sensory-perceptual 'world'2 which
includes tastes, smells, sights, feelings, etc. Korzybski referred to this
'world' as the "silent, un-speakable, objective" level represented in
Figure 1 by a circle. What we know at this level is not theoretical and has
a direct aesthetic value.

As we mature, we enter the third 'world' that we function in as 'multiple
amphibians': language. Korzybski referred to 'world'3 as the "verbal
level". Language allows us to further abstract from or symbolize our
'world'2 sensory experiences. The 'world' of language contains within it
many successive levels: everyday conversation about particulars, as well as
the higher-order abstractions of science, mathematics,  philosophy, etc.
These successive verbal levels are represented in Figure 1 by the labels
hanging underneath the circle.

We can easily become entranced by this third 'world' of language, to the
neglect of our senses. Our education system seems to put an undue focus on
the verbal, symbolic realm to the neglect of the non-verbal one. Even when
we exercise or play sports, we can become dominated by fixed, symbolic
ideas of self-improvement or competition that prevent us from experiencing
the present moment. Consistent with g-s goals, Huxley called for an
education aimed at developing ourselves in the non-verbal as well as the
verbal realms. How do we proceed to develop this potential within
ourselves, 'to empty our cups'?

Consciousness of Abstracting and Non-Verbal Awareness

Together, 'world'2 and 'world'3 constitute the realm of consciousness. As
conscious humans, our nervous systems select-filter from 'world'1 events
occurring inside, on and outside our skins in order to construct 'world'2
(sensory-perceptual) and 'world'3 (verbal) 'maps' of what is going on. This
brain operation of 'mapping' experience makes up the process of
abstracting.

Consciousness thus involves abstracting. We select something(s) to notice
and filter out others. We give our attention to some aspect of a given
situation with a concomitant neglect of other aspects. By becoming
conscious that we abstract, we develop a greater ability to choose what we
abstract: what we attend to and what we neglect. Such consciousness makes
it less likely that we become fixed in our present set of abstractions
(perceiving, labeling, etc.).

Remembering that we abstract gives us evaluational (semantic) flexibility
and can help us to stay in better touch with what is going on in all of the
'worlds' or levels of so-called 'reality'. This flexibility is fostered by
remembering the difference between what you say ('world'3) and your
non-verbal sensory-perceptual experience ('world'2). In this way you can
leave the verbal, intellectual realm at times in order to more fully
experience the non-verbal realm of your senses.

Pinch your ear lobe! Do it now. Now keep on pinching it and say "I'm
pinching my ear lobe." Now stop pinching your ear lobe and say "I'm
pinching my ear lobe." (You will not get any benefit from this, if you
don't actually do it. Words will not suffice!)

This experiment illustrates that the territory of the non-verbal experience
of the pinch is not the same as the word-maps you use to describe it.
Whatever you say about your experience, for example, "ouch!", "it hurts!"
or whatever, is not it. This may seem like "baby stuff". So why do I
mention it?

Korzybski noted that we live and experience our lives on the silent,
un-speakable, non-verbal level of existence. Yet talking to ourselves about
our experience can seem to take up a major part of attention and
consciousness. Turning down the volume of the endless chatter inside our
heads and quieting down the internal noise gives us more of a chance to
receive new signals and thus to learn new things about ourselves and the
world. Not only can this make us more adaptable to changing circumstances;
it can also make life more fun.

I am not recommending that you eschew language altogether. Talking to
yourself and others cannot and should not be avoided. Our ability to talk
makes us human. Yet we need to bring ourselves frequently to the non-verbal
levels of experience to look, listen, observe, etc., if we want our talking
literally to make sense -- a major aim of g-s training.

Remember also that our language behavior has important non-verbal aspects.
For example, it seems all too easy to continue talking to oneself,
preparing a response, when someone else is speaking. Practicing non-verbal
awareness when listening to others involves making a decision at some point
to cease rehearsing our answer to what someone says while they are talking.
This means getting quiet inside and remaining open to what the other person
is saying, not only to their words but also to their tone, gestures, etc.
We can also listen to how we talk to ourselves and others. Quietly
observing our own speech involves another level of internal silence that
can lead to useful insights about ourselves and more fruitful ways of
acting.

Experiments in Sensing

There are also ways we can learn to talk to ourselves to help us experience
the non-verbal level more fully. In the group sessions that I lead at
Institute of General Semantics (IGS) comprehensive seminar-workshops,
participants do experiments in sensing. These are mostly non-verbal
explorations, during which each individual is helped to bring his/her
attention to what's going on within and around him/her. This is based on
the work of Elsa Gindler and Charlotte Selver as taught to me by Charlotte
Schuchardt Read, who led this type of session at IGS seminar-workshops for
many years. During simple activities, group members are guided toward
increased non-verbal awareness by means of verbal directions, mostly in the
form of questions. See the 'Sense-able Questions' template for examples of
the types of questions that can be asked.

These sessions have as a major goal that of helping each person become more
awake and present to here and now events. The work emphasizes the
importance of not immediately jumping in with judgements of right or wrong
but rather of accepting, although not necessarily liking, what happens.
Questions asked during an experiment may include: "What more can I find out
in this situation?", "What do I need for this moment?"

Directions for an experiment in listening follow:

Spend the next few minutes letting sounds from your surroundings come to
you. Notice any tendency to label what you hear or talk to yourself in any
other way. How well can you put aside these labels and bring yourself back
to the sounds?

After several minutes, the experiment stops and people are typically
invited to share some description of their experience. Listening to the
varied responses of people to the 'same' experiment provides a graphic
illustration of how each of us abstracts somewhat differently from the
continuum of events.

Eventually one can begin to construct these kinds of sensing experiments
and ask sense-able questions for oneself. There are endless experiments to
do. Sensory awareness can be done anywhere, anytime: while waiting in
lines, for a bus or in traffic, sitting in a lecture or at your computer
keyboard, etc. When experimenting in this way you may have a concern about
looking silly or childish. Remember, getting more in touch with the
non-verbal world indicates that you have an admirable curiosity about
what's going on. Gently pinching your ear lobe (or finger, arm, etc.) can
help you to remind yourself at these times to become quiet inside.

Kinesthetic Awareness

Our musculoskeletal structure and our movements constitute a major part of
our reactive mechanism as organisms-as-wholes-in-environments. Our
awareness of our muscles and movements is called kinesthesia. Kinesthesia
or kinesthetic awareness includes our sense of muscular tension or ease,
joint position, balance and movement, and involves input from muscles,
joints and the vestibular system of the inner ear.

Korzybski was aware that our evaluational reactions involve various levels
of 'emotional' tension that are both affected by and affect our
neuro-muscular tension levels. Through greater kinesthetic awareness, we
can learn to control our tension levels and move towards greater
evaluational flexibility.

Korzybski noticed that making quiet and firm hand contact could have a
visibly calming effect on "jumpy" horses and people. Following this
insight, he and his associates, especially Charlotte Schuchardt Read,
developed a technique which they called "neuro-semantic relaxation".

Neuro-semantic relaxation involves a gentle handling of the soft tissues of
the limbs and trunk in order to bring about a state of improved circulation
and muscular tone. The individual learns to apply this method to
him/herself. The result as reported is not so much a passive relaxation as
an optimal state for activity. In People in Quandaries, Wendell Johnson
described how to do the procedure to your hands:

    With one hand you simply feel the palm and fingers of the other,
    holding the hand gently without pinching or squeezing it, slowly
    and with light pressure bending the fingers under and back again,
    noting how the hand feels. Is it soft, warm, and dry, or stiff,
    cold, and moist? Do the fingers bend readily? You hold the hand
    with firm but light pressure for a few seconds, then release even
    this light pressure, then apply it again. Now you bend the
    fingers gently again two or three times. You reverse hands and
    repeat the process. That is essentially all there is to it. What
    it amounts to is simply feeling with one hand the state of
    tension of the other, and "loosening up" the one with the other,
    not so much by physical pressure and active massage as by direct
    manual expression of calmness, ease, warmth, reassurance. It is
    the semantic rather than the mechanical aspect that is important.
    (1946, 234)

Johnson and others reported that a dedicated application of this technique
seemed to encourage the ability to delay reactions, which is an important
goal of g-s training.

A state of neuro-semantic relaxation and and improved ability to delay
reactions can be encouraged by other approaches as well. In IGS
seminar-workshops after Korzybski, Charlotte Read focused more on the
sensory awareness work of Gindler and Selver to accomplish this. More
recently I have been influenced both by her and through my studies of the
F. M. Alexander Technique, in developing the group work that I do. .

The Alexander Technique

As a young actor, F. M. Alexander (1869-1955) had an increasing tendency to
lose his voice during performances. Given the possibility of having to give
up his career as an actor, he decided to explore what he was doing with
himself when he lost his voice. By observing himself in mirrors as he
spoke, he gradually became aware that he had a persistent pattern of
tightening his neck, pulling his head backwards on his neck and thus
depressing his larynx when he spoke. This was part of a total pattern which
he came to see included gasping and sniffing for air, thrusting his chest
forward, narrowing and shortening his back, tightening his legs, and
gripping his feet. The summary effect was one of a general shortening of
his stature and undue compression of his joints. This general shortening
occurred at other times as well but seemed especially apparent during the
stress of performances; it could be controlled by specific attention to the
relationship of his head, neck and back.

Alexander began to develop this control when he realized that what he did
with himself was very much a function of habit. Just the thought of
reciting appeared enough to set off the entire fear-based pattern of
tension. He realized that he needed to bring conscious awareness into this
pattern. To accomplish this he began to inhibit or stop his immediate
reaction to his intention to speak, while giving his attention to what he
was doing with his head, neck and back. Specifically, he would provide
himself the stimulus to speak, inhibit his immediate reaction to do so and
instead give himself directions "to let the neck be free, to let the head
go forward and up, to allow the back to lengthen and widen".

Through persistent self-observation he realized that what he thought he was
doing with himself when he gave himself these directions was not
necessarily what he in fact did do with himself. In other words, his
non-verbal kinesthetic map of his actions did not fit what he saw himself
doing in the mirror. He therefore made it a point not to "do" the
directions he gave himself but to use them to guide his self-observation.
In time he found he could more accurately sense what he was doing with
himself and undo his habitual tensions and shortening.

By breaking up an action, such as speaking, into very small steps and
applying the tools of awareness, inhibition and direction, Alexander
discovered a method for bringing conscious awareness and poise into
everyday actions. His method of kinesthetic re-education has significant
connections with g-s. Its principles inform the sessions I lead in the
non-verbal awareness segment of Institute of General Semantics
seminar-workshops.

G-s involves the study of our evaluational reactions: our total response,
verbal and non-verbal, to words, symbols, and other events in terms of
their 'meanings', significance, etc. This response has 'thinking',
'feeling', 'self-moving', 'electro-chemical', etc., aspects that intertwine
inseparably. The Alexander Technique focuses especially on the self-moving
or sensory-motor aspects of our evaluative reactions while not ignoring the
other aspects. Alexander's focus on the organism as a whole, kinesthetic
awareness, the relation of 'thinking' to activity, the role of 'emotions'
in neuro-muscular use, etc., complement and reinforce g-s concerns in these
areas.

Korzybski talked about delaying our reactions as an important
result/indicator of consciousness of abstracting. He noted that "Negative
reactions or 'inhibitions' must be interpreted as the neurological
foundation of 'human mentality'..." ([1933] 1994, 356). Alexander's
application of "inhibition", learning how to pause before and during an
activity in order to observe oneself in activity and to "let the neck be
free", etc., provides a tool for directly practicing delaying our reactions
on a neuro-muscular level.

Alexander Technique work provides practical experience in the physical
concomitants of 'thought'. This accords with Korzybski's teaching of
'thought' as a nervous system activity of the organism. Directing my
awareness especially to my head, neck and back can actually result in
observable changes in functioning. My 'emotional' reactions as evaluative
reactions have a powerful neuro-muscular aspect that I can gain some
control over by means of the Alexander Technique. Anxiety, fear, etc., have
neuro-muscular concomitants that I can learn to recognize more precisely.
The balanced resting state that one can learn to elicit in oneself can
provide a tool for alternative reactions when experiencing some 'emotional'
state. Of course what we say to ourselves also plays a part.

Alexander discussed an extremely important elementalism that
general-semanticists should consider. In g-s terms, an elementalism
consists of the verbal separation of what does not in actuality exist in
isolation. Alexander taught that the elementalistic separation of ends and
means can lead us to focus on what we intend to do (the end) to the
exclusion of how we do it (the means). Alexander highlighted, in
particular, our neuro-muscular habits as important means upon which to
remain focused. He emphasized that the neuro-muscular means in an activity
conditions the end we achieve.

Conclusion

G-s is not just about developing better language habits. We evaluate as a
whole on non-verbal as well as verbal levels: 'thinking', 'feeling',
'sensing', 'moving', etc. Thus, developing more consciousness of our
evaluational habits and more control over them involves developing better
non-verbal as well as verbal skills. Helping each individual get a more
integrated sense of him/herself as an organism-as-a-whole-in-an-environment
has constituted an important goal of g-s training from the beginning of IGS
seminar-workshops. If you wish to know g-s, you must first "empty your cup"
and thus increase your non-verbal awareness.


Works Cited

Huxley, Aldous. 1972. Human Potentialities. In The humanist frame, edited
by Julian Huxley. Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 417-432.

Johnson, Wendell. 1946. People in quandaries: The semantics of personal
adjustment. New York: Harper & Brother

Kodish, Susan Presby and Bruce I. 1993. Drive yourself sane: Using the
uncommon sense of general-semantics. Englewood, NJ: Institute of General
Semantics.

Korzybski, Alfred. [1933] 1994. Science and sanity: An introduction to
non-aristotelian systems and general semantics. 5th ed. Englewood, NJ:
Institute of General Semantics.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

* Copyright Conditions: This material is copyright by Bruce I. Kodish.
However, permission is hereby granted to download, copy and distribute the
text to others if (1) the text is not altered, and (2) there is no charge
to the recipient, and (3) this copyright notice and conditions are
attached.  It is a copyright violation to distribute this material in any
way for which remuneration is received without the prior permission of
Bruce I. Kodish.  Contact: [email protected]; Tel: 626-441-4627

You are viewing proxied material from infinitelyremote.com. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.